Perhaps the biggest technological feud of all time is brewing in Silicon Valley. Google has recently expanded its domain into producing Androids, smart phones that rival the Apple iPhone. Steve Jobbs, co-founder of Apple, feels that Google has picked his pocket and stolen the soul of the iPhone, violating the trust between the two companies. This month, Apple sued HTC, the maker of mobile phones that support the Android platform, claiming that iPhone patents had been violated. The dispute will undoubtedly escalate into a battle royale as Google aggressively challenges Apple for a well-established position in the smartphone market. Ultimately, however, this is more than a feud between two rival companies. It is a contention between two disparate philosophies: proprietary control vs. open source freedom.
Apple maintains tight control over its product in every aspect. The iPhone software is integrated into Apple hardware design and uses iTunes for setup, updates, and application management. Mobile providers of the iPhone must agree to certain user-friendly restrictions. Apple even determines where the iPhone will be sold. As a result, if something goes wrong, Apple will take full responsibility for their product. By restricting hardware and service providers, Apple tailors their product to have optimum performance. Consumers are assured that the iPhone will be user-friendly and reliable, although they may be irked by the lack of freedom.
By contrast, Google has no restrictions on hardware and service providers and has released the Android code under the Apache License. To further nurture innovation, Google hosted the Android Development Challenge, a competition in which the company offered a total of ten million dollars in prizes for developing the most innovative applications for the Android. This approach grants the freedom necessary for collective innovation and improvement. However, there are some disadvantages, as well. Unless Google sets limits on what will work on a particular instance of a platform, Google will have to commit to supporting anything on an open platform. This inefficiency does not guarantee the seamless integration of the Android. Consumers are seeking reliability, user-friendliness, and efficient performance in mobile phone devices. The Android is still in the development stage, so its fulfillment of these consumer requirements are not guaranteed. Also, with an open source environment, the responsibility for a problem is not readily apparent.
It is difficult if not impossible to say which mobile operating system is better. The Android provides versatility, multitasking, and the ability to customize. The iPhone offers reliability, a shallow learning curve, and a smoothly integrated product. Which is better? Ultimately, the choice lies in the personal preferences of the individual consumer. It seems that, despite the rankling feud, Android and the iPhone will continue to possess unique and equally important positions in the mobile phone market.
0 comments:
Post a Comment